When Adventure Designers Cheat

[spunky_mutters]

White Plume Mountain is the poster child for this kind of thing. Nearly every single encounter in that module had such a designer “cheat”. Tomb of Horrors is another such offender.

Designers should make challenges that force the PCs to use their resources, or challenges that allow them to use their resources, not challenges that prevent them from using their resources.

Quasqueton

Yes, WPM is the worst one I'm aware of for this stuff. The frictionless room with super-tetanus pits is one of those that will make your players want to kill you (and playing through it with a magic-user in one of my earliest module experiences was very frustrating). Put a challenge in from of them and then specifically negate most of the ways that they can deal with the challenge. And then make experimenting with entering the area very, very lethal.

I meant that the setup sounds exactly like the robes/uttercold bit at the end of WG4.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Designers should make challenges that force the PCs to use their resources, or challenges that allow them to use their resources, not challenges that prevent them from using their resources.

Unless it becomes a systematic thing ("I'm going to stop the rogue character from sneak attacking anything for the rest of the campaign!"), I'd argue that preventing players from playing to their strengths all the time IS a challenge.

In Midwood, I currently have a warrior and paladin trying to track two missing children while the ranger, who could actually do it well, is on the other end of the barony, unaware of the tracking mission. I'm not trying to be a dick -- she gets plenty of chances to track, in almost every adventure -- I'm just shaking things up for one adventure.

The OP seems to be objecting to one-time challenges, and I can't feel sympathetic.

 

[Kristivas]

I've played in a few such games and, on most cases, just going with it without too much complaint resulted in a fun game. Some DMs (and I assume designers) picture a challenge to go a certain way. This may, or may not, be in line with the rules.

The unbeatable cold or the darkness that can't simply be waved off? I wouldn't call that cheating, I'd call it a challenge. How easy is it to cast Frost Resistance or Daylight? How easy would it be if the same-old, dame-old didn't happen to work?

I'm not saying these things should happen in every single game inside every single dungeon, but once-in-awhile can make for a really good change.

 

[Crothian]

White Plume Mountain is the poster child for this kind of thing. Nearly every single encounter in that module had such a designer “cheat”. Tomb of Horrors is another such offender.

Those two were done in creative and fun ways.

Also, I wouldn't use the word cheat. They are just creating new rules for the adventure no different then a sourcebook that does the same thing. Some are done well, some are not.

 

[Piratecat]

This really sounds like a sloppy conversion of WG4 - which puts the onus on the personal who converted it, as opposed to a professional designer.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Blech. I can't stand the kind of thing the OP is talking about.

Making up new content? I'm all for that. Breaking rules because the adventure writer thought his rules or plot more interesting than the existing rules? No thanks. It's bad enough when the GM does it.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I'm with the Moogle.

If the designer is extending existing rules, or filing in gaps, that's one thing. But defying or breaking rules is flat out wrong, and eliminating character options without using the basic rules structure is bad design (e.g. "no teleport works in this dungeon" without an explanation of " because there is a permanent dimensional achor at 20th caster level active" or somethign to that effect).

i think the world should be consistent, and the rules set up the game world for consistency. There may be things the characters have not experienced or do not understand (and might be in gaps in existing rules) -- that's OK. But to simply decide that black is white in a certain area is just wrong.

 

[Quasqueton]

Those two were done in creative and fun ways.

Nothing creative about saying, “fly, levitate, jump, dimension door, blink and teleport spells will not work in this room.” Or the slippery stuff on the floor, “cannot be affected by any force, magical or otherwise.” Or the copper plates forming the trap, “cannot be damaged or removed.” Or the door will close even if spiked open, and *nothing* will open the door other than the special key held in one of the globes. Or the doors to the room cannot be affected in anyway, magical or mundane. Or that “NOTHING CAN STOP THE DOORS FROM CLOSING IN 5 ROUNDS” (caps in the original text). Or a ring is coated in contact poison “die, no save.”

I don’t find these creative or fun. I find them designer fiat and “cheating”.

“The character is dead, and cannot be brought back to life, including through the use of a wish.”

Quasqueton

 

[Shadeydm]

OMG GAME DESIGNER FIAT!!11!

Please, give me a break this isn't a court of law it's D&D.

Granted the non magical cloak factor of the scenario does a carry a whiff of cheddar but that could be easily fixed by the DM. But wait that would be DM FIAT NOOO.

All you rules lawyer players really crack me up lol.

 

[Quasqueton]

This really sounds like a sloppy conversion of WG4 - which puts the onus on the personal who converted it, as opposed to a professional designer.

Actually, it sounds like a direct conversion of WG4, adhering completely with the original design and feel (the text as written).

Quasqueton